Who is Withdrawing?

[tigerintheboat]

Hi all,

I asked the I Ching what could be expected from easing an employee out of my company (by giving him a bad review, little sympathy, and laying down some stricter guidelines for his success). This employee is a management headache, and although very smart, generally is hard to manage and difficult to focus, wanting to work on what interests him, but not necessarily what we need him to do.

(All of you that are underemployed or unemployed probably hate me already because I am an employer who wants to trim the tree of undesirable growth, but I hope you believe that there are at least a few people working for me who like me and say I am the best employer they ever had! This is all parenthetical to the question, but just to note that I do not regard all my employees in this unfavorable light.)

Ok, back to Mr. X. I received H33.3, H12.

When I read a response like this from the I Ching, I am never sure whether to take them as they seem to be written, in that they seem to suggest or imply correct action on my part, or whether I should twist the syntax, etc, to try to make them describe the employee's actions and the results in the "real world", which is what I meant to ask about. Is the general judgement suggesting that I should withdraw, conceal myself, and Line 3 suggesting that I can't withdraw and must employ helpers? That is most logical to the situation...

Or is the whole thing somehow describing the real world results...that, in Line 3, the employee is tangled and can't leave and simply withdraw? I have a hard time changing the pronouns and making it all fit. The employee should use servants and concubines?

How do others resolve this problem? By asking better, more precisely worded questions, perhaps. I suppose I am just being too literal (and too egocentric) in reading the hexagram, but the language appears to be about my position, and not the employees. Yet, by the way I meant the language, I meant it to be about what happens externally.

Thanks for any help with this!

 

[rosada]

Hi Tiger,
I am not clear exactly what you asked the I Ching. Do you mean you have already let this employee go and you are asking what could be expected because of the manner in which you did it, like you are wondering if he is going to claim you fired him and file for unemployment or did he feel he quit, and therefore will not file for unemployment and 12."Not permit himself to be honored with revenue"?
Or are you still just thinking about letting him go and wondering if the negative review you gave him will result in his quitting? If that is the case, it seems to me the I Ching is saying that giving the fellow a negative review without actually firing him isn't going to improve the situation - perhaps because he wont quit and you'll be stuck with a mad employee - and if you are not going to fire him you would be better off putting him to work doing something he can do that doesn't cause trouble, somewhere he can 12. "Escape the difficulties"!

rosada

 

[tigerintheboat]

Rosada,

Sorry for any lack of clarity...I asked about an action I was thinking of taking. So it is closer to

"...are you still just thinking about letting him go and wondering if the negative review you gave him will result in his quitting? "

except that we are still finalizing the review and it is somewhat truthful and negative and I was attempting to divine the repercussions.

Thanks for your help with this.


Tiger

 

[enmedio de la tierra]

You are asking about undertake mobbing agaisnt an employee. That is unfair, and against the middle way. The answer is a clear advise for you. Of course, you can twist it to fit your wish, but then don't get surprised of you end in hex 12.

 

[tigerintheboat]

What is mobbing?

 

[Trojina]

The answer is fairly literal in 33.3 "to retain people as men and maid servants Brings good fortune" (Wilhelm) You can't get more literal than that ! In other words i don't think you can get rid of him, its too late for that. I tend to find with this line theres an aspect where you are already involved with elements that support you or serve you in some way..now you may wish you weren't in this position with them..but tough cos you are and its generally worse for you to lose them than to keep them.

Your answer is clear, don't aim to get rid of this person but do try to make the best use of them you can..that will serve you better in the long run than hatching plots to be rid of them...

You took him on, you got him...its up to you to make best use of him. I think thats the path you have to travel..

 

[enmedio de la tierra]

Mobbing: indirect abuse in the workplace to force an employee to quit

 

[titania]

Who is withdrawing? You are. You're trying to withdraw from the employer/employee relationship you have with this person.

Lise says this about 33.3:
"In everything one does or meets, there are lower aspects. Stress, disappointment, misunderstanding, claims. Do not fight them, just retreat from them, untie yourself, let them go and move on."

I wonder if you might be letting your feelings get in the way here. If that's the case, consider turning to others in the company to get a more objective perspective on this guy. Once you untie yourself from your bad feelings about him, you might find that he really could be a valuable asset with the right handling. Or you might find out things that support and clarify the need to get rid of him. Either way, you'll be better off than if you continue to pursue your current course of action.

 

[willowfox]

I asked the I Ching what could be expected from easing an employee out of my company? received line 33.3, H12.

This line shows you concern and worry about what you are planning to do about X but it goes on to say that you really need to get rid of him, otherwise he will forever be a drain on your time and patience and thus keeping him will prove to be counter productive, so buck up your courage and make that chop. hex 12 says that this sort of person is of no use to the company, and will be more of a problem as time goes by, time to make a stand.

Obviously, from reading some of the above answers, certain people here have never had to deal with a difficult employee, once you have, you know that they must be removed as quickly as possible, otherwise life just becomes unbearable.

 

[willowfox]

Look at the negative commentary on line 33.3, it says if he doesn't sack this employee then he will be at the tender mercy of X and therefore keeping him is not a grand idea at all, as the commentary says, "for what can one hope to accomplish with such servants?"

The line, should be read this way, "it is nerve wracking and dangerous to retain people as men servants".

 

[enmedio de la tierra]

If you need to fire an employee, you fire it in the propper way. Not by mobbing.

 

[Trojina]

Look at the negative commentary on line 33.3, it says if he doesn't sack this employee then he will be at the tender mercy of X and therefore keeping him is not a grand idea at all, as the commentary says, "for what can one hope to accomplish with such servants?"

The line, should be read this way, "it is nerve wracking and dangerous to retain people as men servants".

Thats not what Wilhelm says and I thought you always stuck to Wilhelm. He translates as "A halted retreat is nerve wracking and dangerous. To retain people a smen and maid servants Brings good fortune"

hes saying in effect you may wish you hadn't gotten involved with these people or relied on them for support but you now cannot afford to withdraw from them..that is what is nerve wracking and dangerous...you have to work with them..trying to withdraw from them proves difficult and you need them so keep them on and manage them better.

Looked at another way this is a problem of management as much as anything. The guy obviously hasn't done enough wrong to justify straight forward firing...seems Tiger just doesn't like his way of doing things and it gives him a headache. Well i think the answer says, 'yup it is giving you a headache but you allowed this person in, or that 'servant' is now in, you have to work with them, manage them better because you can't actually totally withdraw from them. I think there is sometimes a little admonishment in this line about management of those who support you or who are at least meant to be supporting you..if they aren't supporting you properly or you don't like how they do it you have to look at your role in it too

 

[willowfox]

Yes, Wilhelm does say that, but I wonder where the original full stop actually was.

Anyway, at the end of the day a boss cannot carry on with a worker who has conflicting views, something has to break, and therefore, Wilhelm is quite right when he says, "what can you hope to accomplish with such servants". The answer is nothing, so why keep them in one's employ?

 

[my_key]

This employee is a management headache, and although very smart, generally is hard to manage and difficult to focus, wanting to work on what interests him, but not necessarily what we need him to do.

So your perspective is this employee is taxing your management skills with respect to achieving the best performance from him, rather than being someone who is incompetent and unable to do the work. You cannot fire him, for fear of negative reprocussions, so you have chosen to by give him a bad review, little sympathy, and laying down some stricter guidelines for his success.

It is interesting that you have asked about the outcome of the course of action you were thinking of taking. So you have chosen this course...... to show him that his current behaviour is not acceptable to you and by giving him clearer guidelines of what you (the company) expect from him as an employee. This sounds good practice, it may be the manner in which you gave this message is the only thing that is questionable - you haven't really gone into detail in respct of that.

It sounds like you have "been able to interpret the signs of the time before it is too late and to prepare for provisional retreat instead of being drawn into a desperate life-and-death struggle."

And "Thus we do not simply abandon the field to the opponent (your employee); we make it difficult for him to advance by showing perseverance in single acts of resistance." So you have laid out the ground rules and made it clear what is expected of your employee and it's going to be more difficult for him to go away from the company expectations.

H33.3 -Is perhaps saying OK now is the time to step back and let what you have put in place take it's course. If you keep prodding him this may be a case of constructive disissal. He is either going to leave or tow the line. Because of how you have handled the situation, while the employee is still with you the time could be difficult for you and for him both. Which is a real shame.

It may be that you are seeing this as case of give him enough rope he will hang himself (then I can sack him) or perhaps you have cut off your nose to spite your face ( lost a good misunderstood employee). In either case this situation has led to a point of standstill.
Are the two of you really listening to each other? "Mutual mistrust prevails"
Have you really done all you can to get the most out of your employee? " He therefore hides his worth and withdraws into seclusion."
Take Care

Mike

 

[Trojina]

When I read a response like this from the I Ching, I am never sure whether to take them as they seem to be written, in that they seem to suggest or imply correct action on my part, or whether I should twist the syntax, etc, to try to make them describe the employee's actions and the results in the "real world", which is what I meant to ask about. Is the general judgement suggesting that I should withdraw, conceal myself, and Line 3 suggesting that I can't withdraw and must employ helpers? That is most logical to the situation...

Or is the whole thing somehow describing the real world results...that, in Line 3, the employee is tangled and can't leave and simply withdraw? I have a hard time changing the pronouns and making it all fit. The employee should use servants and concubines?

How do others resolve this problem? By asking better, more precisely worded questions, perhaps. I suppose I am just being too literal (and too egocentric) in reading the hexagram, but the language appears to be about my position, and not the employees. Yet, by the way I meant the language, I meant it to be about what happens externally.

Thanks for any help with this!

Back to this question..as you asked the question about what you can expect I would take it that the answer refers to you. Mostly answers do refer to oneself IMO so yes i think the answer is about your position..you need to withdraw from your intention to make life difficult for the employee. It will be more fortunate for you..or rather less unfortunate (since i don't think this is generally a fortunate line more something one must make the best of) to retain him as discussed earlier.

 

[tigerintheboat]

Karcher on servants and concubines

Thats not what Wilhelm says and I thought you always stuck to Wilhelm. He translates as "A halted retreat is nerve wracking and dangerous. To retain people a smen and maid servants Brings good fortune"

I like Karcher's description of this line, not because it particularly helps me, but because it makes sense...
"Entangled in a web of difficulties and relations, you cannot retire. Use servants (who carry out orders) and concubines (who create a pleasant mood) to open your way."

In some sense, that is what I have been doing...I have let the employee work with two different people who are willing to "manage" him and work around his difficult parts, pat him on the head, keep him focused, etc. They "carry out orders" and "create a pleasant mood." They have both found his help valuable technically and useful to their projects, but challenging to manage. He does not get along with the person he should be reporting to.

 

[tigerintheboat]

Where is this translation from?

Look at the negative commentary on line 33.3, it says if he doesn't sack this employee then he will be at the tender mercy of X and therefore keeping him is not a grand idea at all, as the commentary says, "for what can one hope to accomplish with such servants?"

The line, should be read this way, "it is nerve wracking and dangerous to retain people as men servants".

While I appreciate very much your support of employer rights, I don't see where this translation comes from. I am entangled and have difficulty withdrawing, but it seems to me that the servants and concubines (or slaves or handmaidens or whatever) are seen in the reading as auspicious, a means to a better end; but they have to follow orders or make things pleasant, as Karcher says. They don't refer to Mr. X, it seems to me, but to others in the organization.

Thanks for your kind thoughts!

 

[tigerintheboat]

So your perspective is this employee is taxing your management skills with respect to achieving the best performance from him, rather than being someone who is incompetent and unable to do the work. You cannot fire him, for fear of negative reprocussions, so you have chosen to by give him a bad review, little sympathy, and laying down some stricter guidelines for his success.

It is interesting that you have asked about the outcome of the course of action you were thinking of taking. So you have chosen this course...... to show him that his current behaviour is not acceptable to you and by giving him clearer guidelines of what you (the company) expect from him as an employee. This sounds good practice, it may be the manner in which you gave this message is the only thing that is questionable - you haven't really gone into detail in respct of that.

It sounds like you have "been able to interpret the signs of the time before it is too late and to prepare for provisional retreat instead of being drawn into a desperate life-and-death struggle."

And "Thus we do not simply abandon the field to the opponent (your employee); we make it difficult for him to advance by showing perseverance in single acts of resistance." So you have laid out the ground rules and made it clear what is expected of your employee and it's going to be more difficult for him to go away from the company expectations.

H33.3 -Is perhaps saying OK now is the time to step back and let what you have put in place take it's course. If you keep prodding him this may be a case of constructive disissal. He is either going to leave or tow the line. Because of how you have handled the situation, while the employee is still with you the time could be difficult for you and for him both. Which is a real shame.

It may be that you are seeing this as case of give him enough rope he will hang himself (then I can sack him) or perhaps you have cut off your nose to spite your face ( lost a good misunderstood employee). In either case this situation has led to a point of standstill.
Are the two of you really listening to each other? "Mutual mistrust prevails"
Have you really done all you can to get the most out of your employee? " He therefore hides his worth and withdraws into seclusion."
Take Care

Mike

Mike, very helpful and well balanced. Are all the quotes from Wilhelm? There are a few I can't find.
Best, Tiger

 

[my_key]

Mike, very helpful and well balanced. Are all the quotes from Wilhelm? There are a few I can't find.
Best, Tiger

Hi Tiger
It's good to have it confirmed I'm balanced Yes I think the quotes were all Willhelm - when online I tend to use the link to wilhelm on LiSe's web page.
Mike

 

[jend]

33.3

If we considered that the answer pertains to the employee himself:

Perhaps the answer says that what you do will create the need within him to retreat, but at line 3, he won't be ready for it; there is something that keeps him attached to the job. It might be the salary, the relationships developed, both, or something else entirely, but it's too valuable for him to retreat from in spite of the pressure (and in spite of feeling - on some level - that he should retreat).

Whomever the line speaks of, it deals with retreating from a situation or mindset being the right thing to do, but the person not yet being ready to see that (12). Essentially, this person needs to take away/keep something from this situation first, before they can begin to move on. This might be something tangible or not.